My Wordle
Notebook
9/30/08
Blackboard vs. Sakai
I am pushing our Faculty Information Technology Committee (FacIT) to begin a discussion of moving toward an Open Source Course Management System (CMS) and phasing out our proprietary software system, Blackboard. Sakai is my open source platform of choice because it is a system I have used in the past. Here are the major arguments in support of switching from a proprietary system to an open source system for those who believe in having course web sites:
1. An open source system is free. The funds currently being used to pay for licensing the proprietary software could be used to hire staff to aid in the transition to an open source CMS. It's simple: pay for people not for licenses.
2. The open source system works just as well as the proprietary system in my experience. In fact, after an initially steep learning curve, I found Sakai a little less difficult to use and there were a few additional features that I found useful.
3. Blackboard and WebCT are losing market share (six percent from 2006 to 2007 according to the 2007 Distance Education Survey). Thirty-one percent of the respondents to the survey were thinking of changing to a different CMS platform. This is good news, and it is in the interest of colleges and universities to promote market diversity. If the CMS market comes to be dominated by corporate conglomerates, then universities will have to pay the price of monopolies. In any case, there is strong support for the Open Source CMS from major universities.
4. Universities work together to develop solutions to problems. We pool our resources to manage study abroad programs and we share knowledge through journals and conferences. The open source CMS was created by funding from major universities and grant organizations. As we are the repository of the best minds in the country, why should we pay for technology we can build and upgrade ourselves through a cooperative approach? Why adopted the protocols of the business world?
5. If we want to show that our colleges are at the frontier of technology, shouldn't we at least be able to brand and modify our own CMS?
6. Sakai appears to be faster at fixing bugs than Blackboard.
1. An open source system is free. The funds currently being used to pay for licensing the proprietary software could be used to hire staff to aid in the transition to an open source CMS. It's simple: pay for people not for licenses.
2. The open source system works just as well as the proprietary system in my experience. In fact, after an initially steep learning curve, I found Sakai a little less difficult to use and there were a few additional features that I found useful.
3. Blackboard and WebCT are losing market share (six percent from 2006 to 2007 according to the 2007 Distance Education Survey). Thirty-one percent of the respondents to the survey were thinking of changing to a different CMS platform. This is good news, and it is in the interest of colleges and universities to promote market diversity. If the CMS market comes to be dominated by corporate conglomerates, then universities will have to pay the price of monopolies. In any case, there is strong support for the Open Source CMS from major universities.
4. Universities work together to develop solutions to problems. We pool our resources to manage study abroad programs and we share knowledge through journals and conferences. The open source CMS was created by funding from major universities and grant organizations. As we are the repository of the best minds in the country, why should we pay for technology we can build and upgrade ourselves through a cooperative approach? Why adopted the protocols of the business world?
5. If we want to show that our colleges are at the frontier of technology, shouldn't we at least be able to brand and modify our own CMS?
6. Sakai appears to be faster at fixing bugs than Blackboard.
Labels: teaching, technology, web technology
9/10/08
Improving PowerPoint Presentations
I'll be honest, I don't really like giving PowerPoint presentations in front of a class. I think students pay more attention and learn more when I work out my ideas with them on the chalk board or in a discussion with our chairs in a circle. But there are occasions when a PowerPoint lecture makes a lot of sense, such as in overviews of standard theoretical approaches (which I have to give every year) or in introductory level lectures that require the use of lots of maps or visual images.
In the past, I always tried to cram as much information onto the slides as possible. I practically outlined every strand of the argument I wanted to make. Of course, I knew this was a bad idea... it is clear even to the novice that PowerPoint is not designed for much more than a few bullet points (in very large font size) per slide. My excuse was that I just wanted to make the slides self-explanatory for students who missed the lecture. In reality, I was worried that I would forget to mention an important point or that I would fumble a transition to the next slide.
I have finally started experimenting with a minimalist approach to PowerPoint. The result so far is that the slides don't seem to be as boring. Nevertheless, like any editing, it takes far more time to create a minimalist slide than a detailed one.
By limiting the content the presenter gets foregrounded and PowerPoint recedes into the background as a mere visual/mental cue. I would ideally like to get to the point where I just have one topical word or relevant image per slide.
Of course, the PowerPoint format can lead to over-simplification ("dumbing down") of complex arguments and passivity on the part of the listener. However, fewer words per slide leaves more room for the speaker to breathe complexity back into the presentation.
I guess the trick to keeping the class lecture fresh and stimulating is knowing when and how much to use PowerPoint and when to stick to the old chalkboard... Here are the guidelines that I am developing for myself...
My only dilemma about these practices is that I do want to make my course content available as part of my support for the Cape Town Open Education Declaration. I guess that for the moment, since I make my syllabi and some class resources available for free on my web site, I am still doing my part in keeping my classroom open to the world. I offer as much on-line to my own students as I do to students in the global classroom.
Okay, back to ruthlessly editing slides...
In the past, I always tried to cram as much information onto the slides as possible. I practically outlined every strand of the argument I wanted to make. Of course, I knew this was a bad idea... it is clear even to the novice that PowerPoint is not designed for much more than a few bullet points (in very large font size) per slide. My excuse was that I just wanted to make the slides self-explanatory for students who missed the lecture. In reality, I was worried that I would forget to mention an important point or that I would fumble a transition to the next slide.
I have finally started experimenting with a minimalist approach to PowerPoint. The result so far is that the slides don't seem to be as boring. Nevertheless, like any editing, it takes far more time to create a minimalist slide than a detailed one.
By limiting the content the presenter gets foregrounded and PowerPoint recedes into the background as a mere visual/mental cue. I would ideally like to get to the point where I just have one topical word or relevant image per slide.
Of course, the PowerPoint format can lead to over-simplification ("dumbing down") of complex arguments and passivity on the part of the listener. However, fewer words per slide leaves more room for the speaker to breathe complexity back into the presentation.
I guess the trick to keeping the class lecture fresh and stimulating is knowing when and how much to use PowerPoint and when to stick to the old chalkboard... Here are the guidelines that I am developing for myself...
- I only use PowerPoint in my Introductory level courses. I don't use PowerPoint in my 200, 300, and 400 level courses after the first day (if I can avoid it). I devote those upper level courses to making students actively work through and critique the arguments in the readings.
- When I use a PowerPoint in class, I try to make sure that I leave a segment of the class session to return to the text or the chalkboard. Working the text and thinking things through on the chalkboard is integral to the craft of teaching. It not only lends drama to the classroom, it shows students that learning/teaching is an on-going and interwoven process. Taking teaching seriously is the essential difference between what we do in small liberal arts colleges and what passes for teaching in the large education factories.
- I don't use standard clip art cartoons, transitional animations, transitional sound effects, etc. I try to think of PowerPoint as a neater version of my hand writing on the chalk board. The seduction of PowerPoint technology is powerful, but it can also lead to gimicky presentations if those temptations are not managed carefully.
- I no longer allow students to bring laptops into my classroom and I do not post up my PowerPoint presentations. I encourage my students to learn to take notes by hand and to share notes with one another if they miss a point or a class. My hunch is that this makes students think more about what they are writing and appreciate the classroom experience. It also encourages them to represent their ideas spatially in diagrams. Of course, some students will end up doodling, but that is their choice. They may revisit their note taking techniques after the first quiz.
My only dilemma about these practices is that I do want to make my course content available as part of my support for the Cape Town Open Education Declaration. I guess that for the moment, since I make my syllabi and some class resources available for free on my web site, I am still doing my part in keeping my classroom open to the world. I offer as much on-line to my own students as I do to students in the global classroom.
Okay, back to ruthlessly editing slides...
Labels: teaching, technology